I NEED a new drug...

[Dan Quan]

Opps! I mean camera.

I REALLY REALLY REALLY miss having an MF'r around and I was going to get another Rollei SL66. Now I'm thinking about trying a Pentax 6x7 MLU ( Mirror Lock-Up) because square always bugged me, I guess I'm more comfortable with rectangular framing. And I would like to experiment again with odd lenses and optics that are not necessarily OEM, like binos and ancient glass.

So, I'm thinking of a rectangular image camera body that:
1) has a built in shutter (of course) including T or B or both.
2) sync's with flash
3) is easy to repair or replace (which the SL66 wasn't)
4) has as minimal a flange distance as possible
5) takes a pola back (preferred but not exclusionary)
edit to add:
6) is an SLR or has TTL viewing so I can see what these freakish lenses are doing.

I really would appreciate any and all input and help with this decision. Thanks.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Aside from the built-in shutter, the RB67 is the perfect camera for what you want. But I'd bet the built-in shutter, especially if you want to use the camera with odd lenses, is kind of a deal-breaker.

You could get a Baby Speed Graphic, and just use a 6x7 roll back on it, or a 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 Speed Graphic and use a roll film back on it. That wouldn't get you Polaroid capability, but you said that's also a nice-to-have, not a requirement. Flange distance is NOT an issue with these.

If you can put up with square, there's always an ARAX/Hartblei overhauled Kiev 88. They're certainly cheap enough if you want something to play with. I think there was an FSU medium format SLR that shot 6x7 but I could be wrong and they were all 6x6.

 

[Dan Quan]

Aside from the built-in shutter, the RB67 is the perfect camera for what you want. But I'd bet the built-in shutter, especially if you want to use the camera with odd lenses, is kind of a deal-breaker.

You could get a Baby Speed Graphic, and just use a 6x7 roll back on it, or a 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 Speed Graphic and use a roll film back on it. That wouldn't get you Polaroid capability, but you said that's also a nice-to-have, not a requirement. Flange distance is NOT an issue with these.

If you can put up with square, there's always an ARAX/Hartblei overhauled Kiev 88. They're certainly cheap enough if you want something to play with. I think there was an FSU medium format SLR that shot 6x7 but I could be wrong and they were all 6x6.

hmm...

Good info, i've never heard of the ARAX/Hartblei, I will check that out.

I guess I also want a TLR.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

hmm...

Good info, i've never heard of the ARAX/Hartblei, I will check that out.

I guess I also want a TLR.

Look for them on Ebay - search for Kiev 88, and then look for ones that say "rebuilt/overhauled by ARAX" or "Hartblei". Both vendors take Kiev 88s and do full body-off-frame overhauls and turn them into reliable cameras. And then you get all that wonderful, cheap Russian glass to play with.

For a TLR, you can't go wrong with a Rolleiflex. Most other TLRs are cheaper, but few are even equals when it comes to image quality, let alone the total package of ergonomics, image quality, and reliability.

 

[Dan Quan]

Look for them on Ebay - search for Kiev 88, and then look for ones that say "rebuilt/overhauled by ARAX" or "Hartblei". Both vendors take Kiev 88s and do full body-off-frame overhauls and turn them into reliable cameras. And then you get all that wonderful, cheap Russian glass to play with.

For a TLR, you can't go wrong with a Rolleiflex. Most other TLRs are cheaper, but few are even equals when it comes to image quality, let alone the total package of ergonomics, image quality, and reliability.

I gave up drinking last year and now have no excuse for thinking Through The Lens viewing or SLR and posting TLR. Sorry.

 

[snapguy]

My...

I used a Rolleiflex professionally in the 1960s and a Yashicamat professionally in the 1970s. I often blow the b&w negs from both up to very large and you can't tell the difference. Both are capable of superb large prints. I still have one of the former and two of the latter.

 

[frank]

It's square, but the old Bronica SLR's fit the rest of your needs/wants.

 

[Dan Quan]

I used a Rolleiflex professionally in the 1960s and a Yashicamat professionally in the 1970s. I often blow the b&w negs from both up to very large and you can't tell the difference. Both are capable of superb large prints. I still have one of the former and two of the latter.

I love the smell of fix in the morning! Well any time of day actually, but I'm old and totally dry now. I will likely be shooting Ektar 100 and having it commercially souped. Also, I have a friend with a nice 120/135 scanner I will use.

It's square, but the old Bronica SLR's fit the rest of your needs/wants.

I keep looking at the cool square cameras but I'm almost sold on the Pentax 6x7. Almost, very nearly I think.

 

[MattKing]

A Mamiya 645?

 

[Dan Quan]

A Mamiya 645?

Interesting suggestion. Some of these are inexpensive enough I may be able to eventually try a few of these different suggestions.

 

[Alan Gales]

Have you priced the Pentax 6x7 cameras and lenses lately? They have been going pretty cheap, especially if you buy the older 6x7 with the mirror lock-up. The newest 67 goes for more money.

I personally prefer the Mamiya RZ/RB's but a good friend of mine has owned a Pentax 6x7 for over the 20 years that I have known him. He hates the Mamiya's.

 

[bdial]

I think a baby Speed would be the most flexible if lens experiments are a primary goal. If you get one with a grafloc back, you can use the ground glass to see what the lens is up to, then pop on the roll back for the exposure. For times you aren't experimenting, you have a rangefinder available.
Adapting lenses will be much easier with no proprietary mount to worry about.
OTH, it won't be a particularly fast camera to work with.

 

[jadphoto]

Aside from the built-in shutter, the RB67 is the perfect camera for what you want. But I'd bet the built-in shutter, especially if you want to use the camera with odd lenses, is kind of a deal-breaker.

You could get a Baby Speed Graphic, and just use a 6x7 roll back on it, or a 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 Speed Graphic and use a roll film back on it. That wouldn't get you Polaroid capability, but you said that's also a nice-to-have, not a requirement. Flange distance is NOT an issue with these.

If you can put up with square, there's always an ARAX/Hartblei overhauled Kiev 88. They're certainly cheap enough if you want something to play with. I think there was an FSU medium format SLR that shot 6x7 but I could be wrong and they were all 6x6.

There is one, not very well known, Polaroid back that will fit a Baby Graphic if it has a Graflok back. It was made for the Horseman VHR and should come with an infinity stop spacer so you can focus using the rangefinder if you like. If you're using the ground glass there's no need for the spacer.

They do come up on Ebay on occasion.

JD

 

[Dan Quan]

Have you priced the Pentax 6x7 cameras and lenses lately? They have been going pretty cheap, especially if you buy the older 6x7 with the mirror lock-up. The newest 67 goes for more money.

I personally prefer the Mamiya RZ/RB's but a good friend of mine has owned a Pentax 6x7 for over the 20 years that I have known him. He hates the Mamiya's.

The RZ/RB are all leaf shutter reliant though, correct?

I think a baby Speed would be the most flexible if lens experiments are a primary goal. If you get one with a grafloc back, you can use the ground glass to see what the lens is up to, then pop on the roll back for the exposure. For times you aren't experimenting, you have a rangefinder available.
Adapting lenses will be much easier with no proprietary mount to worry about.
OTH, it won't be a particularly fast camera to work with.

I actually tried shooting people when I had my Horseman 810 LX and the narrow depth of focus I like was exceedingly frustrating for me. I was able to focus on the ground glass but consitently lost focus by the time I shot. I am hesitant to relive that experience. Conversely I did have good success shooting people with SL66.

 

[Dan Quan]

There is one, not very well known, Polaroid back that will fit a Baby Graphic if it has a Graflok back. It was made for the Horseman VHR and should come with an infinity stop spacer so you can focus using the rangefinder if you like. If you're using the ground glass there's no need for the spacer.

They do come up on Ebay on occasion.

JD

I have wanted a VHR for a long time, but the idea of shooting people focused on a GG is off-putting in my current headspace.

 

[Alan Gales]

The RZ/RB are all leaf shutter reliant though, correct?

Yes, the RZ/RB cameras use leaf shutter lenses only.

 

[Chrismat]

I've had a Pentax 6X7 since the early 80's and I love it. When I got back into photography a few years ago, I did purchase an RB67 with a few lenses and film backs for a nice price and really liked the system. The advantage to the Mamiya RB is of course, the revolving back which allows for vertical shooting without having to tilt the camera body and being able to change film types mid roll. The lenses are very good, but I ended up selling the system because it was (for me) more annoying carrying around the Mamiya because of the shape of the body. I find it easier and more comfortable carrying the Pentax 6X7. If you do get the Pentax just remember to get a good tripod if you intend to do any significant amount of vertical shots.

Chris

 

[frank]

Not having to tilt the body to shoot a vertical is also an advantage of square format.

 

[Dan Quan]

I've had a Pentax 6X7 since the early 80's and I love it. When I got back into photography a few years ago, I did purchase an RB67 with a few lenses and film backs for a nice price and really liked the system. The advantage to the Mamiya RB is of course, the revolving back which allows for vertical shooting without having to tilt the camera body and being able to change film types mid roll. The lenses are very good, but I ended up selling the system because it was (for me) more annoying carrying around the Mamiya because of the shape of the body. I find it easier and more comfortable carrying the Pentax 6X7. If you do get the Pentax just remember to get a good tripod if you intend to do any significant amount of vertical shots.

Chris

Excellent advice! I actually do have at lest 2 tripods and possibly a third if I keep my tall Majestic which might go to 12 or 14 feet. I can't remember which of my Majestics has the extra center extension.

Not having to tilt the body to shoot a vertical is also an advantage of square format.

I am also considering a 2000FC/w or such just for the faster shutter...

Would someone please tell me what problems a 2000FCM with a wrinkle in the shutter might pose?

 

[r-brian]

One thing no one mentioned with the Pentax 67 is the flash sync speed, 1/30 sec. Having shot a Bronica SQa for years and a 4x5 field camera, I sold both and bought a Mamiya RZ67. Having gotten use to waist level finders with Rolleiflexes (and I still have a couple of Mamiyaflexes for when I'm feeling square), the RZ handles real nice with the waist level finder. I do have a prism finder but find I use the WL more. But only in-lens leaf shutters, but they do sync up to 500 sec.

 

[Dan Quan]

One thing no one mentioned with the Pentax 67 is the flash sync speed, 1/30 sec. Having shot a Bronica SQa for years and a 4x5 field camera, I sold both and bought a Mamiya RZ67. Having gotten use to waist level finders with Rolleiflexes (and I still have a couple of Mamiyaflexes for when I'm feeling square), the RZ handles real nice with the waist level finder. I do have a prism finder but find I use the WL more. But only in-lens leaf shutters, but they do sync up to 500 sec.

Since I'm planning on non OEM lenses I need a shutter in the camera.

 

[Alan Gales]

The early Bronica EC's and S2a's are pretty neat if you decide to go back to square images. They have focal plane shutters and helical focusing and can focus really close. I once focused my RZ67 on a cereal box on the table and compared my EC to it. The RZ's bellows focussing is legendary. My EC focussed almost as close.

The early Bronica's are cheap and use inexpensive Nikkor, Bronica and Komura lenses. They also have a huge history of people cobbling other lenses on them. It sounds like this it what you want to do.

 

[mweintraub]

The Pentax 67s can't take Polaroid backs.

The Bronica would be out also because of the leaf shutter system. hm.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Opps! I mean camera.

I REALLY REALLY REALLY miss having an MF'r around and I was going to get another Rollei SL66. Now I'm thinking about trying a Pentax 6x7 MLU ( Mirror Lock-Up) because square always bugged me, I guess I'm more comfortable with rectangular framing. And I would like to experiment again with odd lenses and optics that are not necessarily OEM, like binos and ancient glass.

So, I'm thinking of a rectangular image camera body that:
1) has a built in shutter (of course) including T or B or both.
2) sync's with flash
3) is easy to repair or replace (which the SL66 wasn't)
4) has as minimal a flange distance as possible
5) takes a pola back (preferred but not exclusionary)
edit to add:
6) is an SLR or has TTL viewing so I can see what these freakish lenses are doing.

I really would appreciate any and all input and help with this decision. Thanks.

As has been mentioned already, 2x3 Speed Graphic with Graflok back and the hard-to-find Horseman 2x3 Polaroid back (KEH seems to have one now) will give you TTL focus and composition, focal plane shutter and the ability to use some Polaroid films. Formats available are nominal 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9. Graphics' focal plane shutters won't sync with electronic flash at any speed, so you'll have to give up flash with lenses in barrel or find a way to mount lenses in barrel in front of or behind a leaf shutter. I do both (lens in front of leaf shutter, leaf shutter in front of lens) but the adapters needed aren't cheap. To see what I've done, read http://www.galerie-photo.com/telechargement/dan-fromm-6x9-lenses-v2-2011-03-29.pdf

As have been mentioned already, Bronica S, S2 and EC if you can stand 6x6. No good with short focal length lenses not made for them.

Re flange-to-film distances, 2x3 Century and Pacemaker Crown Graphics' is 34.6 mm, 2x3 Pacemaker Speed Graphic's is 61.9 mm. The shortest lens I use on my Century is a 38/4.5 Apo Grandagon. The shortest lens I've used on my 2x3 Speed is a 1.75"/2.8 Elcan ex-Vinten F95. I rarely use it because it doesn't cover 2x3; it was made for 6x6. These lenses are scarce and expensive. The shortest more-or-less readily available lenses that cover 2x3 and will work on a 2x3 Speed are 65 Super Angulons and clones (Horseman, Ilex and 58/5.6 and 60/5.6 lenses for Koni/Rapid Omega).

 

[film_man]

Not having to tilt the body to shoot a vertical is also an advantage of square format.

RB67 my friend...